LinkedInXFacebook
Subscribe
Orthopedics This Week
  • My Feed
  • |Posts
  • |Events
  • |MSK Innovations
  • |Power Rankings
  • |Masterclasses
  • |Technology Awards
  • Press Releases
  • |Advertising
  • |Job Board
  • Spine
  • ◆Joints
  • ◆Upper Extremities
  • ◆Foot & Ankle
  • ◆Sports Medicine
  • ◆Pain Mgmt
  • ◆Trauma
  • ◆Biologics
  • ◆Technology
  • ◆People
  • ◆Company News
  • ◆Legal & Regulatory
Home/Large Joints and Extremities/Taiwanese Poly Knee Insert Cleared for U.S.
Large Joints and Extremities

Taiwanese Poly Knee Insert Cleared for U.S.

April 19, 2017 2 min read Premium comments

Advertisement

Taiwanese Poly Knee Insert Cleared for U.S.
U2 Total Knee System / Courtesy of United Orthopedic Corporation
Secondary

Taiwan-based United Orthopedic Corporation’s E-XPE polyethylene knee insert has been cleared by the FDA for sale in the U.S.

According to an April 12, 2017 company announcement, the insert is designed to provide patients with knee replacements with reduced risk of oxidation. Calvin Lin, president of United Orthopedic Corporation USA, said, “Oxidation continues to be a concern for surgeons. The E-XPE polyethylene is resistant to oxidation and performs extremely well with respect to abrasive wear resistance.”

The insert is a highly cross-linked polyethylene blended with 0.1% (w/w) vitamin E to enhance wear resistance without compromising oxidative stability and mechanical properties.

Indications

The device (CR, PS and UC type and patella,) according to FDA documents, is indicated in knee arthroplasty for “reduction or relief of pain and/or improved knee function in skeletally mature patients with severe knee pain and disability due to rheumatoid arthritis, osteoarthritis, primary and secondary traumatic arthritis, polyarthritis, collagen disorders, avascular necrosis of the femoral condyle or pseudogout, posttraumatic loss of joint configuration, particularly when there is patellofemoral erosion, dysfunction or prior patellectomy, moderate valgus, varus, or flexion deformities. This device may also be indicated in the salvage of previously failed surgical attempts if the knee can be satisfactorily balanced and stabilized at the time of surgery. This device is a single use implant and intended for cemented use only.”

The E-XPE insert (PSA type) is indicated in knee arthroplasty for “reduction or relief of pain and/or improved knee function in skeletally mature patients with severe knee pain and disability due to rheumatoid arthritis, osteoarthritis, primary and secondary traumatic arthritis, polyarthritis, collagen disorders, avascular necrosis of the femoral condyle or pseudogout, posttraumatic loss of joint configuration, particularly when there is patellofemoral erosion, dysfunction or prior patellectomy, moderate valgus, varus, or flexion contraction. This device is intended for use in patients who require augmentation and/or stem extensions due to inadequate bone stock and/or require constrained stabilization for tibiofemoral joint due to soft tissue imbalance. This device is a single use implant and intended for cemented use only.”

Predicate Devices

The company’s clearance request stated that predicate devices included its own U2 Total Knee System, Renovis Surgical Technologies’ A200 Knee System, DePuy’s PFC Sigma Knee System and Biomet’s Vanguard DCM Conventional Tibial Bearings.

Advertisement

The differences between the E-XPE and the predicate devices, according to the company, are size distribution, device dimension and material.

Vertically Integrated Manufacturing

The company was established in 1993 in Taiwan to supply orthopedic practitioners and institutions around the world with arthroplasty implant and instrument designs created by its vertically integrated, in-house manufacturing team. In March 2014, the company entered the U.S. market.

React:

Discussion

14
DS
Dr. Sarah MitchellOrthopedic Surgeon · Mayo Clinic

This is a fascinating development. In my practice we've seen similar outcomes with the revised protocol. The key differentiator seems to be patient selection criteria. Has anyone else noticed the correlation with BMI thresholds?

8
JT
James Thornton, MDSpine Fellow · HSS

Great point. I'd push back slightly on the conclusion, the sample size in the cited study is too small to draw population-level inferences. That said, the directional signal is compelling and worth a larger RCT.

5
RP
R. PatelSports Medicine · Stanford

We implemented a similar approach last year. Early results are promising but we're still gathering 12-month follow-up data. Happy to share our protocol if anyone is interested.

Join the conversation

Orthopedic professionals are discussing this. Sign in and upgrade to read every comment and add your voice.

Subscribe

Get Full Access

Read every OTW article and join member discussions for $24.99/month.

Get Full Access

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Orthopedics This Week

The most trusted source in orthopedic industry news since 2005. Covering spine, joints, trauma, biologics, and the business of orthopedics.

A publication of RRY Publications, LLC

LinkedInXFacebook

Categories

  • Spine
  • Joints
  • Upper Extremities
  • Foot & Ankle
  • Sports Medicine
  • Pain Mgmt
  • Trauma
  • Biologics
  • Technology
  • People
  • Company News
  • Legal & Regulatory

Resources

  • Subscribe
  • Community Posts
  • Job Board
  • Press Release Opportunities
  • Power Rankings
  • About OTW
  • Advertise
  • Contact Us

Get Full Access

Unlimited articles, community posts, and Power Rankings.

Get Full Access

Plans start at $24.99/mo · Annual saves 20%

© 2026 Orthopedics This Week · RRY Publications, LLC

Privacy PolicyTerms of ServiceCookie Policy